Haven for the Human Amoeba

Yes! Yes! I totally agree. It's the mystery, the feelings, and so on, that are so lovely, but as soon as the quest for orgasm gets in there it does become selfish...that was so well put, Jay! My friend/partner and I have this ongoing mystique (I'm not sure I'd call it carnal...guess I just don't like that word), and we know it will never end in sex...that just makes it all the more alluring.

X.

I see that someone named oneeggtofry has joined us. I had to scratch my head (and keyboard) to find what song that comes from. I finally found it:

A song written by Burt Bacharach.

"One less bell to answer

One less egg to fry

One less man to pick up after

*** "

It was originally made big by the 5th dimension.

I am surprised to learn that Sheryl Crow has covered the song. I have not heard her song.

Anyway, welcome to the list, oneeggtofry.

jay

Believe it or not, little punk rock drksparkle adores Burt Bacharach. I even have him listed in my profile!

I'm surprised that Sheryl Crow covered it, I haven't heard that. I only know the 5th dimension version (that's the version that is on my 3-disc Burt Bacharach collection!)

(Sorry I got carried away, I get like this when I talk about music...carry on with normal board conversation)

drksparkle, caught between the moon and new york city.

I always liked Dionne Warwick, whose songs SFAIK were always Burt Bacharach compositions. And then Dionne Warwick sold her soul to "psychic friends network"...which is like being caught between the moon and Uranus. Maybe she lost her ability to sing?

jay

Well thank you! I didn't know Sheryl Crow sang that too!

I for one do not believe in asexual romances. Just as sex, I believe it does not exist. Then again I think that nothing but the mind exists. Its all an illusion, some of it just seems more real. So why bother seeking out other people? Why bother seeking out that Hallmark invention "romance"? None of it is real. Might as well play video games or dream. At least during those times, I have control over my destiny.

I have been looking over the past few posts and feel they can describe most of my relationships, in the fact that they (the relationships) are charged with something. I believe this something to be a knowledge and space of friendship that sex takes away. Sex can be amazing i have heard, but for me it is not worth taking away the charged effects of my relationships in order to conform to the world. Speaking of friendships, i feel that step in a relationship is severely over looked!! People jump over this step in order to get to the "summit" of sex. I feel more fulfilled in great, friendships that have become deeper relationships than many of my friends who have been in and out of sexual relationships.

"I for one do not believe in asexual romances. Just as sex, I believe it does not exist."

That's like saying you believe today doesn't exist, or ice cream doesn't exist. I am in an asexual romance and believe me, baby, it exists.

X.

Sorry for the delay. Busy work week!

This is a reply to a question by BRC that started a whole thread before I even read the question!

Anyway, Romance to me is: infatuation, obsession, idealizing, pining away for, being in love, etc, etc, etc, with someone I date. It can be painful (If I feel their need for me is less intense than my need for them) or it can be euphoric (in fact, the most intense euphoria Ive ever felt). And YES, it can, and has, lead to destructive relationships with men who were completely inappropriate for me in the context of freinds.

HOWEVER.... NONE of the abovementioned feelings have ever been linked to any physiologic desire to have sex with, make love to, be orgasmed by, orgasm them, etc, etc. I have had romantic fantasies (staring into each other's eyes, kissing, hugging, cuddling...) but that's where it would stop. I'd be totally satisfied with the kissing, hugging, and holding stuff.

For me it has been all about the face, eyes, mind, heart....but never the Genitalia (or as I like to say with a smirk, "the Gennies")!

I *can* say I'm glad that I have not wanted to 'do it' in even my most intense romance ever, because I do hear about (and as I read the posts before me) apparently having sex with someone only makes the romantic entanglement even more intense.

My theory after much psychotherapy has been that my Ego somehow put a block in my brain's channel from romantic attraction to sexual arousal before I even hit puberty when my ego realized just how STRONG my emotions could get for someone (the first romantic obsession was at 13 years old). By doing so my ego was saving me from ever being suicidally depressed in the face of a breakup.

And, (here I go) I am familiar with the perceptive experience of orgasm, (so you can't say that's the problem!) however, never have I connected it with a fantasy of being in the company of another. I have actually tried fantasizing about someone I was romantically interested in (knowing that that is what most people do) and it was really awkward.

This is why, in my opinion I am 'Hetero-' when it comes to romance but 'A-' when it comes to sexual desire. I mean, I would kiss a man I'm in love with in a heartbeat, but if I *had* to make a choice between 'getting sexual' with that same man or a woman, both would be equally 'too weird' or 'awkward'.

eep! I forgot!

'Twas interesting reading the concept of 'fidelity' as defined to require sex as the indicator.

Now, from my planet thiz how it's been... :-)

For me, romantic fantasy, resultant behaviors, and dishonesty were the indicators of infidelity. When I was 19 (11 year ago, egad!) I was in a 1-year relationship with this guy in college. Well, what led to its ultimate demise was when this new Russian guy appeared on the scene, and showed some interest in me... and though i was committed to my boyfriend, I found myself romantically obsessing over Russian Guy... The fantasies about him brought me to the point where I no longer wanted to kiss my boyfriend. I was able to explain all of this to Russian guy and he left me alone.. however I never completely recovered from that, never told my boyfriend the whole scoop, and had to break up with my boyfriend, feeling confused as hell.

Similar thing happened again four years later with my second (and last) serious boyfriend, of three years. The romantic infidelity did not end our relationship however.. What *did* end it was when we started considering marriage when I was 23, I had to see for myself if I had been "missing something" so I actually tried the sex thing with him 7 times (awkward! Like, "Insert Tab A into Slot B!") . However, it only proved to me my indifference to sex, and since he wished for sexual fulfillment, we had a mutually painful breakup. I still love him to this day. It is because of him mainly that I wish I was interested in sex. .. but I could not have married him and put on a facade for the rest of my life. Being who I am without him in my life is better than faking who I am with him in my life.

OK! well.. with that, I will go and feed my cats!

SaMaNtHa

^ ^

= " =

For some reason I just thought of that skit in

Monty Python's The Meaning of Life (I believe it was

that one) wherein the guy (was it michael caine?) was

teaching that class on how to have sexual intercourse by

demonstration with props: himself, a bed, and a lady..

meanwhile as he is demonstrating the copulatory act and

speaking in such esoteric verbosity like an old crusty Ivy

League professor would, the whole class is yawning and

falling asleep... It was such a crack-up!!! It was an

imaginary world of Samanthas!

SaMaNtHa

One of the dictionary definitions of "romance" is, simply "a love affair." I tend to make a distinction between romance and infatuation. Romance, to me, is the exchange of loving words, consideration, caring (can even be in poetry!), regard, and so on. Infatuation involves obsession, longing, fear, and often ultimately possessiveness, jealousy, which can end in either indifference or hatred. To me, this has nothing to do with love, which is, after all, the ultimate need of mankind...both to express and receive. And love has nothing to do with sex, although sometimes sex seems to accompany it.

X.

OK, BRC summoned me and I finally got here. I didn't have internet over the break and it took me three days to catch up on the posts. (I won't post until I've read everyone elses, because I don;t want to be too redundant, or comment on a closed discussion)

There seems lately to be a lot of discuassion on "ASexual Dating" and "Primary Asexual Partners" and the like. Now, for those of you who don't know, I am a heterosexual male, the forum's resident sexual. I consider myself Platonic (hence the name) which to me means that I form relationships ona Asexual basis, and if sex happens, then fine. But instead of ranting on Theoretical stuff(which is BRC's Fortem=, and I'll leave it to him) I think I'll just give you a brief overview of what lead me to this "State"

It started with Micheal J. Fox. I was five, and I thought he was really cool in all his movies. His characters always started out dorky and became cool by the end of the movie. He also got the girl. So my little mind put two and two together- Having a girlfriend makes you cool. I immediately set about aquiring one.

My first attempts failed. Each failure made me feel lonely. Now, i hadnn't felt lonely before that point. I had friends and a loving family. But the more I tried to find this "Special Someone", the lonelier I felt without it. In high school there were point I considered taking my life becaue I didn't have that one "All important" Romantic relationship, despite having almost everything else one could want in life.

I eventually found someone who thought I was worth dating. I was the happiest I'd ever been in my life, so much so that I forgot about almost everything else to the exclusion of this relationship. When she dumped me a year later, I had nothing left. I had ignored my friends, forgotten my hobbies and lost my drive.

At this point BRC and I were hanging out at a place in ST. Louis called The Caso Loma ballroom. We both swing dance. It was here that He and I formed teh Platonic Pimp association. I discovered that I could pick up anyone, anywhere, and become "Just" good friends. BRC wanted to figure out the social dynamics of flirting. So together we explored the possibilities of this Non-sexual social interaction.

During this time I gave up on my "need" to find a special someone. I'm not trying to get all Taoist here, but without that desire I felt very free. I no longer was searching for that special someone, I was just making friends. I nefver felt the need to hook up just for sex because I could masterbate. I neer felt the need to hook up becaue I was lonely because I had friends, and even if I didn', I was comfortable with myself and didn't need anyone else to be complete.

While in this state I did find someone, and she and I were togethere for a while. I Lost my virginity to her, but when we went away to college, things got messy. Again, the relationship became a defining factor of myself, and without it, I was lonely. It took me a long time to rebuild my strength of self after that. At one point I was so depraved I was flirting with girls I had no interest in maintaining a friendship with. But I recovered.

None of my problems were a result of my sexuality- In fact, I think I only mentioned it twice in there. They had resulted from fixation on the relationship instead of the people involved. Desiring a specific type of relationship leads to trouble, because you then try to fit whoever you can into the spot you've created, and they almost certainly won't fit without some shoving. I was only happy when I found the person I wanted, and then formed a relationship around that.

After I recovered, I found my fiance. I use the term loosely, we're more than dating but we aren't officially married. We're expecting a child in june. We still have stuff to work out, but we are forming our relationship as we go.

Maybe this bit of personal experience (and a bit of Philosophizing, sorry) can add to the pot of Ideas on how one forms a relatioinship, asexual or not.

For me, being in love implies being obsessed with someone. I also find this a strange state of being. And, I wonder whether I've ever been "in love". Yes, I had twice a relationship, and they lasted only for 3 months.

I felt that the other one's feelings were much more "being-in-love-feelings". I acted sometimes as "being in love", but it felt strange - not really me, acting how I was supposed to act instead on acting on how I felt. So, I'm not sure whether I am good at romantic feelings, being in love feelings.

I feel better in friendships. I feel my feelings then are true, I like doing things together with friends. I see my friends rather realistic (I think), and I don't have to "praise" them. To me, friendship is stronger, more true, more like to adults together, ... I really don't have these feelings that I think the other one is like "god", "heavenly", ... I think I'm too realistic for being in love.

I wonder whether there are other asexuals who don't feel good at being in love, who haven't really been in love, who are too realistic to be in love, ...

As a consequence, I don't think that (If I will meet someone) my primary relationship will be based on some kind of romance. It will be more based on friendship, but then, I don't know on what base I would prefer one friendship over another. I see it possible that I form a primary relationship on base of mutual needs. (So I think, the need for such a relationship will become stronger when I become older, more needy ...)

Well, I'm still thinking on why people form relationships (sexual or asexual, romantic or not, friendships ,...).

I seems a bit rational, but I think people form relationships because they need something, because they think they will be better with the relationship then without it, because they want company, ... So, somehow people make a balance. When a relationship gives them more than they need to give up (relationships have implications, put limitations on people's wishes, ...) the relationship makes people feel better.

So, I wonder, if people would feel more at ease with themselves, they probably would be less driven to form relationships. The more you have inside of you, the less you try to find it outside of you.

I think company of others is a basic need of people. However, I think that a person at ease with himself, has less needs to be accompanied by others... and will be more selective in his choice of friends.

What do you think ...?

As to romance, being in love, ... : people project things on others. This often works, because, in the beginning, you don't know the other that good. They make the other the way they want them to be, not how they really are. I don't consider this as love. On the contrary, it's egoistic self-love, because you deny the real nature of the other one. The other one may not be who he is, he has to be the way you want him to be.

What I don't understand is: romance, being in love is mostly the starting point of a "primary relationship". Those who see the other one more the way he is, more realistic, maybe shows more real love for the other, but, mostly this doesn't lead to a "primary relationship". I find this kind of unfair, ...

I jumped a bit from one subject to another, but I wonder what you think of what I wrote?

BRC, maybe I've missed the beginning of this, but can you explain a bit more in detail what you want to do, how you want this to do (by e-mail?), when, where, how intensive, ...?

I think the best relationships are the ones you don't go looking for...they just happen.

Also, I believe there is another kind of relationship that is neither "being in love" or just "friendship"....it's more than friendship, but it is not obsession. And it can include a sense of romance--although that word seems to be open to debate!

X.

First Thought:

In college, I took an introductory class to psychology. I remember famous psychologist's theory. I believe it was the Hieracrchy of Needs. Any how, the theory formed a pyramid with the top point representing perfection of an individuals psychological health. Perfection represented one of the five needs that one progressed from.

The first need in a person's life was to obtain food, shelter, and clothes.

After one fulfilled the first, it was thought that they proceeded to fill the second need for a sense of belonging. In another words, they don't to want to feel alone in the world.

Then, the third need was filled. I believe it was the need to feel loved. As I recall, sexual desire was not specifically mentioned.

There was a fourth need which I don't recall. The class was in the morning so forgive me.

The last need was to reach perfection in all areas of life. The theory stated that most of us don't ever reach this level, and if we do, it was difficult to maintain.

Second Thought:

In the main stream relationships, homosexual or heterosexual for that matter, the initial dating process usually involves pursuit of sex. Romance and the pursuit of a marriage or long relationship seem to come in a later stage.

In pursuant of sex, male or female, it seems that one projects a false image of themselves since they seem to some sort of self confidence issue. They apparently believe they are not sexually attractive to the desired company so they have to fake an image of themselves. Once sex has occurred, it appears that then they think about the romance part of the relationship.

Up to this point, there seems to be many opinions of what Asxuality is. I have read where Asexuals simply are not interested in any sexual activity, but are still interested in romantic relationships up to including marriage. On the other hand, I have seen definitions which refer to Asexuals no having romantic relationships and sexual activity as well.

Perhaps an organization could clarify the definition of Asexaul and be helpful to more confused persons out there. On the other hand, it could be divisive as well. Regardless, some dialogue on Asexuality could only be beneficial despite differences in opinion.

I think that's the problem here. We are the confused people, yet we're also the organization to further clarify the definition. In a way I think the definition shouldn't be too clarified. Who can define homosexuality in such a way that it doesn't between 10% and 30% of those that identify as Homosexual? Such a definition would have to be loose, broad and open to interpretation, sorta like the constitution. The same goes for Asexuals. The more specific the definition gets, the more wrong it would be.

Here's a half hearted try.

Asexual: One who does not desire sex.

Differs from

Celibate: One who does not engage in sex.

What has me interested right now is what seeems to be a prevalent desire to find ones "Primary Partner"

As Asexuals (and allies0 we are already questioning the prevalent belief that sex is a neccessary part of our interactions with others. This is a very radical shift in thinking from the societal norm. But is the need for a primary partner any less a questionable societal norm than sex? Doesn't the need for a "Primary Partner" arise out of sexuality? What is it, other than our culture, sthat says we need to prefer one person to all others?

Not to say that it's a bad thing if you do. Like I said, I'm affianced. I just want to question the need for a primary partner in asexual relationships.

I fail to see your point. I can imagine many strong relationships with a "Primary Partner" where sex doesn't enter the picture at all. The most obvious situation would be two asexuals, but there are other situations as well.

The final point is that if you find somebody who compliments your life in powerful ways, and you love this person -- why not? Especially since the above requirements would imply that the partner understands who you are, and the fact that sex need not be a component of this relationship.

Is it just the culture though? I don't think so. The human mind is capable of being attached to multiple people in strong ways, but not nearly as well as with one person. Sure, this might be a product of culture -- but if that is what it is, it is also irrelevant because it is a built-in factor at this point in our lives. Sure, in some imaginary culture it might be different, but who cares about that imaginary culture. We live in this one. In this one, it is more "healthy" and psychologically easy to form a strong long term relationship with only one person.

Then there is the alternative. What if what you say is accurate. Should the asexual only desire a life alone? Even with radical cases like myself where I have a strong tendancy to be alone, I can see the merits -- and furthermore dream of the situation -- where another person could help me through this life.

I don't see anything wrong with that. I don't see anything sexual with that. Unless I choose the wrong person, like I have in the past, and then it doesn't work. That is really the only place where it breaks down.

What I'm trying to get at is that it isn't just a choice between "somebody who compliments your life in powerful ways," and "a life alone." Why is it that we feel that there must be a single person out there who is the compliment to us in every way? Why do we feel alone without this imagined person?

I'm not saying that asexuals should settle for never finding such a relationship. But I think there are other answers to loneliness, and that as Asexuals, we are in a unique position to question the need to focus on a single person as a "Primary Partner"

I think we as humans need to form relationships. There is going to be an understanding on some level with the people you meet. Within this club, it is the knowledge that we are all asexual, in a band or something like that it is the knowledge that you all play an instrument, etc. For me, by forming these relationships, i see myself in a different light, this being cast by the other person. Not all of my relationships have worked out, mainly because of the expectations projected by me or on me, but it is because of the more powerful relationships i have formed in the past years, that i am the person i am now.

On romance...

Today's society has embedded love and romance so far into the topic of sex, that it takes a strong couple to see that love and romance and sex are totally different things and you can have romance and love without having sex or anything leading up to sex.